The DOI matches its Crossref record; 120 of the 120 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Electric field depth–focality tradeoff in transcranial magnetic stimulation: Simulation comparison of 50 coil designs
Open accessAbstract
Background Various transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coil designs are available or have been proposed. However, key coil characteristics such as electric field focality and attenuation in depth have not been adequately compared. Knowledge of the coil focality and depth characteristics can help TMS researchers and clinicians with coil selection and interpretation of TMS studies. Objective To quantify the electric field focality and depth of penetration of various TMS coils. Methods The electric field distributions induced by 50 TMS coils were simulated in a spherical human head model using the finite element method. For each coil design, we quantified the electric field penetration by the half-value depth, d1/2, and focality by the tangential spread, S1/2, defined as the half-value volume (V1/2) divided by the half-value depth, S1/2 = V1/2/d1/2. Results The 50 TMS coils exhibit a wide range of electric field focality and depth, but all followed a depth–focality tradeoff: coils with larger half-value depth cannot be as focal as more superficial coils. The ranges of achievable d1/2 are similar between coils producing circular and figure-8 electric field patterns, ranging 1.0–3.5 cm and 0.9–3.4 cm, respectively. However, figure-8 field coils are more focal, having S1/2 as low as 5 cm2 compared to 34 cm2 for circular field coils. Conclusions For any coil design, the ability to directly stimulate deeper brain structures is obtained at the expense of inducing wider electrical field spread. Novel coil designs should be benchmarked against comparison coils with consistent metrics such as d1/2 and S1/2.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(2020) · Electromagnetic Processes · doi:10.2307/j.ctv131bv37.5 · Cited by 21,966
Rossi, S., Hallett, M., Rossini, P. M., & Pascual-Leone, A. (2009) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2009.08.016 · Cited by 5,367
NON-INVASIVE MAGNETIC STIMULATION OF HUMAN MOTOR CORTEX
Barker, A. T., Jalinous, R., & Freeston, I. L. (1985) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(85)92413-4 · Cited by 4,460
Deep Brain Stimulation for Treatment-Resistant Depression
Mayberg, H. S., Lozano, A. M., Voon, V., McNeely, H. E., Seminowicz, D., Hamani, C., Schwalb, J. M., & Kennedy, S. H. (2005) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2005.02.014 · Cited by 4,059
O’Reardon, J. P., Solvason, H. B., Janicak, P. G., Sampson, S., Isenberg, K. E., Nahas, Z., McDonald, W. M., Avery, D., Fitzgerald, P. B., Loo, C., et al. (2007) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2007.01.018 · Cited by 1,910
A comprehensive review of the effects of rTMS on motor cortical excitability and inhibition
Fitzgerald, P. B., Fountain, S., & Daskalakis, Z. J. (2006) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2006.06.712 · Cited by 1,024
Electromagnetic fields and energy
Haus, H. A., & Melcher, J. R. (1989) · BiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library) · Cited by 782
Targeted electrode-based modulation of neural circuits for depression.
Mayberg, H. S. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1172/jci38454 · Cited by 542
Transcranial magnetic stimulation of deep brain regions: evidence for efficacy of the H-Coil
Zangen, A., Roth, Y., Voller, B., & Hallett, M. (2005) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2004.11.008 · Cited by 473
Ueno, S., Tashiro, T., & Harada, K. (1988) · Journal of Applied Physics · doi:10.1063/1.342181 · Cited by 442
Cited by
Lefaucheur, J.-P., Aleman, A., Baeken, C., Benninger, D. H., Brunelin, J., Di Lazzaro, V., Filipović, S. R., Grefkes, C., Hasan, A., Hummel, F. C., et al. (2020) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2019.11.002 · Cited by 2,382
Rossi, S., Antal, A., Bestmann, S., Bikson, M., Brewer, C., Brockmöller, J., Carpenter, L. L., Cincotta, M., Chen, R., Daskalakis, J. D., et al. (2021) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2020.10.003 · Cited by 1,573
Self-citationStanford Neuromodulation Therapy (SNT): A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial
Cole, E. J., Phillips, A. L., Bentzley, B. S., Stimpson, K. H., Nejad, R., Barmak, F., Veerapal, C., Khan, N., Cherian, K., Felber, E., et al. (2022) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2021.20101429 · Cited by 795
McClintock, S. M., Reti, I. M., Carpenter, L. L., McDonald, W. M., Dubin, M., Taylor, S. F., Cook, I. A., O’Reardon, J., Husain, M. M., Wall, C., et al. (2018) · The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · doi:10.4088/jcp.16cs10905 · Cited by 693
Self-citationPerera, T., George, M. S., Grammer, G., Janicak, P. G., Pascual-Leone, A., & Wirecki, T. S. (2016) · Brain Stimulation · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2016.03.010 · Cited by 674
Metadata
- Authors
- Deng, Z.-D., Lisanby, S. H., & Peterchev, A. V.
- Venue
- Brain Stimulation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-01
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-13
- ISSN
- 1876-4754 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-861X
- OpenAlex
- W2123712730
- Cited by
- 1,073
- References
- 120
- FWCI
- 13.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Electric field depth–focality tradeoff in transcranial magnetic stimulation: Simulation comparison of 50 coil designs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.brs.2012.02.005
- The paper
- Deng, Z.-D., Lisanby, S. H., & Peterchev, A. V. (2013). Electric field depth–focality tradeoff in transcranial magnetic stimulation: Simulation comparison of 50 coil designs. Brain Stimulation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2012.02.005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
